In God's Name Read online

  Subsequently others had been equally impressed with Foligni’s Vatican connections. He had opened the Vatican doors to an Austrian named Leopold Ledl. It was Ledl who had put the Vatican deal together – the purchase of 950 million dollars’ worth of counterfeit bonds, the purchase price to be 635 million dollars. ‘Commission’ of 150 million dollars would be paid back by the gang to the Vatican, leaving the Mafia with 485 million dollars and the Vatican with bonds that had a face value of nearly one billion dollars.

  The American Mafia had been sceptical about the deal until Ledl produced a letter from the Vatican. Written under the letter-heading of the Sacra Congregazione Dei Religiosi it was confirmation that the Vatican wished to ‘buy the complete stock of the merchandise up to the sum of 950 million dollars’.

  Foligni had told the American investigators that Marcinkus, ever prudent, had requested that a trial deposit of one-and-a-half million dollars’ worth of the bonds be made at Handelsbank in Zürich. According to Foligni, Marcinkus had wanted to satisfy himself that the bonds would pass as genuine. Late in July the ‘trial’ deposit was duly made by Foligni. He nominated Vatican cleric Monsignor Mario Fornasari as the beneficiary of the account he opened.

  A second ‘trial’ deposit of two-and-a-half million dollars’ worth had been made at the Banco di Roma in September 1971. On both occasions the bonds had passed bank scrutiny, a tribute to Mafia skill. Regrettably for the conspirators, both banks had sent samples to New York for physical examination. The Bankers Association in New York ascertained that the bonds were false. Hence the unusual presence of American attorneys and men from the FBI within the Vatican walls.

  Apart from a desire to recover the balance of 10 million dollars’ worth of the initial delivery, Lynch and his colleagues were anxious to bring all the participants in the crime to justice.

  Foligni had told the investigators that the reason the Vatican required the fake bonds was to enable Marcinkus and Italian banker and businessman Michele Sindona to buy Bastogi, a giant Italian company with wide interests including property, mining and chemcals. Bastogi’s headquarters were in Milan; so were Sindona’s. It was in this city that the then Archbishop Montini, later Pope Paul VI, had met Sindona. When Montini had become Pope, the Vatican gained a new heir to Peter and the Vatican Bank gained a new lay financial adviser, Michele Sindona.

  William Lynch, himself a devout Catholic, continued his story. Mario Foligni, it transpired, had fired a series of accusations at Bishop Marcinkus during the US Department of Justice interrogations. Apart from the allegation that Sindona and Marcinkus had planned to buy Bastogi with fake bonds, Foligni also asserted that with Sindona’s assistance, the Bishop had several secret numbered bank accounts in the Bahamas for his personal use.

  Under interrogation Mario Foligni had claimed that he had been working personally with Benelli’s office, the Secretariat of State, and that as a direct result of his cooperation ‘the Secretary of State had caused stringent administrative action to be taken against Bishop Marcinkus, which severely restricted the Bishop’s enormous financial power within the Vatican.’ Foligni had insisted that he had told the Secretariat of State of the trial deposits he had made in Switzerland and Rome and that this information was used by Benelli’s office against Marcinkus. He had also advised the Justice Department that he was under orders from the Secretary of State’s office not to give the investigators any further details concerning the swindle.

  Having put this evidence forward the Americans sat back and waited for a response. As William Lynch and William Aronwald made clear when I interviewed them, this first meeting at the Vatican was not seen by either side as an interrogation. It was informal, an opportunity to lay before members of the Vatican’s Secretariat of State some very serious allegations.

  The Justice Department was aware that the central thrust of the allegations stemmed from two expert con-men but there was also powerful internal evidence to support the validity of the statements of Foligni and Ledl.

  It was because of that evidence that William Aronwald had contacted Cardinal Cooke of New York via the US attorney for the southern district of that city. The Cardinal had been most co-operative and via the Papal delegation in Washington this extraordinary meeting had been arranged. Its real object was not merely to lay information, but ultimately to confront Marcinkus.

  While more coffee was served the three monsignors remained silent but thoughtful. Eventually Monsignor Martinez, Assessor of the Secretary of State’s office, responded. He assured the Americans that he and Monsignor Rauber had complete knowledge of all the affairs of Archbishop Benelli and categorically denied that Foligni had turned over any evidence to Benelli’s office. As for the counterfeit bonds and the trial deposits this was the first time that anyone on the Secretariat of State had heard about the affair. Taking a classic Curial position he remarked that, ‘It is not the intention of the Vatican to collaborate with the United States officials in their investigation at this point, since this is considered to be an informal meeting, and our purpose at the present time is only to listen.’

  What Lynch and his colleagues were confronted with was a mentality that has defeated many better minds than theirs – that of the Curia, a body of men that gives absolutely nothing away; a Government machine that holds the Roman Catholic Church in a vicelike grip. Lynch reminded the monsignors that to date only four million dollars’ worth of the fake bonds had been recovered and continued: ‘Since all evidence strongly indicates that the eventual destination for all of the bonds was the Vatican Bank and in view of the fact that the total amount ordered is worth 950 million dollars perhaps I can give you a list of the types of bonds?’

  Martinez merely swayed out of the path of that punch. Lynch persisted. ‘That way the records of the Istituto per le Opere di Religione can be checked to determine if any of the counterfeit stocks have been “inadvertently” received on deposit at that bank.’

  The style of Martinez in the ring was really most impressive.

  ‘I, of course, have no idea if any of these American counterfeit bonds have been received by our bank. I cannot, however, take a list from you to check. That would be the function of Bishop Marcinkus. He handles such matters. Perhaps if you have difficulty in contacting the Bishop you might send a list with a formal letter to the Papal Nuncio in Washington.’

  It was obviously time for a change of tactics.

  The US attorneys produced a document they had taken from Leopold Ledl after his arrest. The Vatican seal was on the letterhead below which was printed, ‘Sacra Congregazione Dei Religiosi’. It was the Vatican order for nearly one billion dollars’ worth of counterfeit securities. It had convinced the Mafia. The monsignors examined it carefully. There was much staring and holding up to the light.

  Martinez rubbed his chin thoughtfully. The Americans leaned forward eagerly. Perhaps they had finally got one past the redoubtable Martinez.

  ‘The letterhead appears to be identical to the letterhead of one of our sacred congregations which is located here in the Vatican.’

  There was a pause. Just time for the Americans to enjoy the moment. Then Martinez continued:

  ‘However, I would note that while the letterhead appears to be legitimate that particular congregation changed its name in 1968 and that as of the date of this letter, June 29th, 1971, the name shown on the letterhead would be incorrect. The new name is Sacra Congregazione per i Religiosi e gli Istituti Secolari.’

  The American investigators had, however, succeeded in their main objective. It was agreed that they could see Bishop Paul Marcinkus face to face the following day. This in itself was an extraordinary achievement, for Vatican City fiercely guards its independent statehood.

  During my interview with Cardinal Benelli he confirmed that he had indeed received information about the whole affair from Mario Foligni before the Vatican visit of the American investigators. It had seemed to the Cardinal to be a self-serving effort by Foligni, who by that time knew the game was up.
As to the validity of the information, Benelli confined himself to the observation that he found the information ‘very interesting and useful’.

  On the morning of April 26th, 1973, the two American attorneys and the two FBI men were shown into the private office of Bishop Paul Marcinkus. Lynch and Aronwald repeated the story they had told the previous day while Marcinkus puffed on a large cigar. In the light of some of his subsequent omissions his initial remark is of particular interest.

  ‘I am very disturbed by the seriousness of the allegations. In view of them I’ll answer each and every question to the best of my ability.’ He began with Michele Sindona.

  ‘Michele and I are very good friends. We’ve known each other for several years. My financial dealings with him, however, have only been very limited. He is, you know, one of the wealthiest industrialists in Italy. He is well ahead of his time as far as financial matters are concerned.’

  He extolled the virtues and talents of Michele Sindona at some considerable length. Then, placing the Vatican Bank on a par with the confessional, Marcinkus remarked:

  ‘I would prefer to withhold names in many of the instances I intend to give because although the charges that Foligni makes against me are extremely serious they are so wild that I do not believe it necessary to break banking secrecy laws in order to defend myself.’

  While the previous day’s meeting had been largely of an informal nature, this confrontation with Marcinkus was an interrogation. On the evidence that the US Department of Justice had carefully and painstakingly acquired over more than two years, Lynch and Aronwald and FBI agents Biamonte and Tammaro had before them the man who had master-minded one of the world’s greatest swindles. If the evidence was correct then the Chicago suburb of Cicero’s claim for world notoriety would in future be shared by Al Capone and Paul Marcinkus. But as Mrs Beeton observed, ‘first catch your hare’.

  William Lynch raised the temperature a little.

  ‘If it becomes necessary at some future date will you make yourself available for a face to face confrontation with Mario Foligni?’

  ‘Yes, I will.’

  ‘If it becomes necessary are you also prepared to testify in a United States court?’

  ‘Well, yes, if it’s absolutely necessary. I hope it won’t be though.’

  ‘Why?’

  ‘Well the only people who would gain anything if I appeared in court would be the Italian Press.’

  ‘How’s that?’

  ‘They frequently relish the opportunity to write inflammatory material concerning the Vatican, whether it’s true or not.’

  Lynch and Aronwald showed a total lack of concern at the Vatican’s sensitivity towards the Italian Press.

  ‘Do you have a private numbered account in the Bahamas?’

  ‘No.’

  ‘Do you have an ordinary account in the Bahamas?’

  ‘No, I don’t.’

  ‘Are you quite certain, Bishop?’

  ‘The Vatican does have a financial interest in the Bahamas but it’s strictly a business transaction similar to many controlled by the Vatican. It’s not for any one person’s private financial gain.’

  ‘No, we are interested in personal accounts that you have.’

  ‘I don’t have any private or public account in the Bahamas or anywhere else.’

  How Marcinkus constantly carried his salary and expenses around in cash was not explored. Neither did Marcinkus reveal that he was in fact on the board of directors of Banco Ambrosiano Overseas in Nassau and had been since 1971. He had been invited on to the board by the two men who had set up this Bahamas operation, Michele Sindona and Roberto Calvi. Both men used the Bishop’s name frequently in their business deals. Sindona put it bluntly to Marcinkus on one occasion: ‘I’ve put you on the board because your name helps me to raise money.’

  Sindona and Calvi showed their gratitude by giving Marcinkus and the Vatican Bank 2.5 per cent of the Nassau Bank’s stock. This eventually rose to 8 per cent. Marcinkus frequently attended board meetings and took holidays in the Bahamas. It must have been irksome constantly having to change the large amounts of currency that, according to the statements he made to the American investigators, he would have been obliged to carry – the first President of a Bank in the world’s history without a personal bank account.

  At this point in the interrogation Bishop Marcinkus observed: ‘You know my position within the Vatican is unique.’

  One of the world’s great understatements was followed by: ‘I’m in charge of what many people commonly refer to as the Vatican Bank. As such I have complete control of Vatican financial affairs. One of the things that makes my position completely unique is that I am answerable only to the Pope as to how I handle those financial affairs. In theory my operations are directed by a group of cardinals who meet from time to time and generally act as overseers to the Bank. In reality, however, I virtually have a sole hand in directing the financial affairs of the Vatican.’

  The personal testimony did not impress the Bishop’s listeners.

  ‘What’s the point you’re trying to make?’

  ‘Well, this position that I hold has led to, shall we say, certain hard feelings by other men in responsible positions within the Vatican.’

  ‘Really?’

  ‘Oh yes, it’s just part of the job I’m afraid. I am the first American ever to have risen to such a position of power within the Vatican and I’m sure that this has also caused a certain amount of hard feelings.’

  Whether he was guilty or not of being the mastermind behind this enormous swindle, Paul Marcinkus undoubtedly spoke the truth when he talked about ‘certain hard feelings’ held by other senior men within the Vatican, and not only there. In Venice, Cardinal Albino Luciani was another whose feelings towards Marcinkus grew somewhat more than ‘hard’ as Benelli told him of this latest episode in the Marcinkus saga. Ironically what Benelli did not know was that, during that private interview with the American investigators, Paul Marcinkus had attempted to entangle him in the swindle.

  To read the statement Marcinkus made, it is clear that in his eyes everyone but himself merited investigation. Of Father Mario Fornasari, who was allegedly deeply involved in the affair, Marcinkus noted:

  ‘Some of the people who work for me at the Bank have pointed Fornasari out to me as an individual to avoid. I’m sure you know that Fornasari was denounced some time ago for writing libellous letters.’

  ‘Really, what happened?’

  ‘I believe the charges were dropped.’

  Marcinkus conceded that he had been involved with Mario Foligni, without doubt one of the principal figures in the billion dollar swindle, on at least two business ventures. The first concerned a 100 million dollar investment scheme that did not come to fruition. The second was a 300 million dollar deal involving Foligni and the Italian industrialist Carlo Pesenti. That too had aborted, but as Marcinkus told his convoluted tale he was at pains to drag in Benelli’s name. Apart from demonstrating that his ego had been bruised because Benelli had asked Pope Paul to consider the 300 million dollar deal and Marcinkus clearly believed that no one should talk to the Pope about money but him, Marcinkus also attempted to link Benelli and Foligni, presumably working on the law of guilt by association. In view of the subsequent activities of Michele Sindona and Roberto Calvi, both close friends of Marcinkus, it would be interesting to know if Marcinkus still holds to this dubious legal tenet.

  What Marcinkus neglected to explain, perhaps because he was not asked to, was why he was even prepared to consider the 300 million dollar deal involving Foligni, some eight months after Foligni had unloaded 1.5 million dollars’ worth of fake securities in a Swiss Bank and some six months after he had unloaded 2.5 million dollars’ worth of phoney bonds in the Banco di Roma. As President of the Vatican Bank it is inconceivable that Marcinkus was the only head of a bank in Europe not to know of these criminal activities.

  At the end of a long interrogation, Marcinkus maintained total innoc
ence and disclaimed all knowledge. He happily accepted a list of the counterfeit bonds and said he would keep his eye open for them.

  A variety of people were eventually found guilty of involvement in the billion dollar swindle. With regard to the allegations that Bishop Paul Marcinkus was involved, Attorney William Aronwald told me:

  The most that could be said is that we were satisfied that the investigation had not disclosed sufficiently credible evidence to prove or disprove the allegation. Consequently since we were not morally satisfied ourselves that there was anything wrong, or that Marcinkus or anyone else in the Vatican had done anything wrong, it would have been improper of us to try to grab some headlines.

  It is abundantly clear that what seriously restricted this investigation was not the lack of will of the United States investigators. They tried hard, very hard. It would later be alleged that they were themselves part of a giant coverup,* that they had merely gone through the motions of an enquiry. This is nonsense and shows total ignorance of the very real problems that are posed when an investigation which begins in one country has to be continued inside another. The Vatican City is an independent State. That Lynch and Aronwald and the men from the FBI got inside the Vatican gates at all is a tribute to their tenacity. One cannot go rushing over the Tiber like a TV New York cop, armed with a .45 gun, search warrants, authority to hold and question witnesses and the many other legal devices that can be used within the United States.

  If Vatican City were part of the United States then doubtless all members of the Curia working in the Sacra Congregazione Dei Religiosi would have been interrogated in depth. Fingerprints would have been taken. Forensic tests on all typewriters within the Congregation would have been made. If all that could have been done the question of Bishop Marcinkus’s guilt or innocence might have been resolved. The fact that the United States Government took the evidence seriously enough to risk a very delicate political situation is illuminating in itself. As William Aronwald said to me, ‘We were not about to waste that amount of taxpayers’ money unless we took the evidence very seriously indeed. At the end of the investigation the case against Marcinkus had to be filed for lack of evidence that might have convinced a jury.’